FLA Proposal

This Wiki is read-only for reference purposes to avoid broken links.

FLA Proposal Summary

The FLA Proposal is for the community to utilise the Free Software Foundations (FSF) Fiduciary License Agreement (FLA) to license all code and documentation.

The Fiduciary License Agreement (FLA) is a copyright assignment that allows Free Software projects to bundle their copyright in a single organisation or person. This enables projects to ensure their legal maintainability, including important issues such as preserving the ability to relicense and certainty to have sufficient rights to enforce licenses in court. The assigning party does not lose their ability to use their code either, as the FLA ensures a re-transferral of unlimited usage/single exploitation rights back to the author. [1]

You can read the FLA here. [2]

How would the FLA work?

1. We would appoint the FSF to undertake this work for us.
2. They would allow us to use the licensor: Free Software Foundation Europe, e.V.
3. All source contributors as part of establishing commit rights, would be asked to sign the FLA.
4. All code would need to have the license updated for works where the copyright holder has signed the FLA.
5. Where code exists and the copyright holder has not signed the FLA, to the extent that it is compatibly licensed it can be included in the project.
6. Over time we will reduce the copyright holders down to one.

Here is an example [3]

What about existing code contributions?

If existing contributors are unwilling to sign the FLA, the first thing to do is to discuss with them why not If they still do not want to sign, but their code is already in the public domain under a compatible open source license then we should keep the code. Where the non-FLA code is significant, we should look to re-implement this under the FLA license in the future. Where the non-FLA code is not significant, we should look to immediately remedy or exclude from the project.

All new contributions should be made under the FLA.

What are the benefits?

1. FSF acts as the legal guardian and will protect the community from legal disputes on copyright of the code and documentation.
2. FSF acts as a neutral third party for industry.
3. It protects developers from the increasingly common occurrence that more and more companies are running Free Software projects and ask developers to give up their rights so these companies and then selling proprietary versions of that piece of Free Software.
4. Safeguards users from buyouts or insolvency of the copyright holder..
5. Increase trust in the community.

What about new works for a vertical?

As long as the original copyright owner is happy to sign the FLA and license the vertical under the GPL.

FSFE grants to Beneficiary a non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual and unrestricted licence in the Software. This right’s (and licence’s) scope shall encompass and include all the rights (and licences) specified in § 1. Furthermore, FSFE grants to Beneficiary additional non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, redistribute and make available the Software as needed for releases of the Software under other licences. This re-transfer shall not limit the scope of FSFE’s exclusive licence in the Software and FSFE’s rights pursuant to § 1.

Will the FSF adopt our project?

The FSF does not automatically accept projects in to its scheme. The guidelines for adoption are outlined here [4]

An initial assessment of the criteria are as follows:

1. technology: high
2. effort : moderate
3. copyright history : moderate - high (contributions are clearly attributed)
4. risk status : moderate
5. Licensing policy : high (with support of the commit committee)

My discussions with Shane Coughlan is that they are interest in support the project but we need to submit our application through the defined process.

What is the application process?

1. Submit application.
2. FTF Co-ordinator assesses project against criteria and makes a recommendation to accept, decline or discuss further.
3. The recommendation is reviewed by the FSFE's Extended Executive Committee and either passed or ....
4. Sent to the FSFE General Assembly and/or Team for review and decision.